Navigate:

Health care not broke, so don't fix it

'Costs to the people are already rising,' the author says. |
AP Photo
Close

By BARRY GOLDWATER JR. | 1/26/11 2:04 PM EST

In his State of the Union address Tuesday, President Barack Obama opposed the effort to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, claiming the repeal would add a quarter-trillion dollars to the deficit.

Instead, he lauded the health care bill for stopping unscrupulous insurance companies from exploiting patients. He demeaned insurance companies for not covering pre-existing conditions. He applauded the legislation for slowing down the rise in medical costs. He granted that the program needed fixing – promising to work with the Congress on doing so.

Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

What the president does not understand, however, is that this program is similar to the bankrupt and under-performing single-payer coverage now found in Britain, France and other countries where patients wait for needed medical care. Canada’s Medicare allocates services primarily by time — forcing patients to wait weeks, or even months, to receive urgent screening and surgery. Britain’s National Health Service determines what procedures and which patients get treatment. Health rationing is prevalent in all government-run health programs.

Obama does not understand that America’s system of health delivery was not broke — but certainly not perfect. Our system of market-based health delivery has created the best medical service to more people than any other system in the world. The insurance industry has evolved over the years as a state-regulated industry, managed not by Washington but by states themselves.

The new health care law reverses that progress by giving the federal government more control. We do not have to look far to see Washington’s record at managing such tasks: Medicare and Social Security, as well as railroads and the post office, are mismanaged and on the verge of bankruptcy.

No, his new program that the president is forcing on Americans is broke and will not work. Costs to the people are already rising. Companies are raising costs to employees, getting rid of company-sponsored employee health programs, or simply not hiring at all for fear of not being able to afford expanded health care coverage.

There are new regulations dictating to insurance companies what they can pay for overhead and what they must pay to the patient. The Medical Loss Ratios that small and medium insurance companies cannot meet are likely to force many of them out of business, destroying jobs that sustain millions of Americans.

Under the health care law, Congress demanded a study by a newly created agency, the Federal Insurance Office, which would recommend changes to the insurance industry. There is a built-in conflict of interest – indeed, to think that Washington would be able to manage nationwide insurance better than the states can manage it themselves is ludicrous.

The health care legislation’s overbearing mandates remain in place, including a new federal agency with sweeping powers: the Independent Payment Advisory Board. It is one of the 150 new boards and commissions established under the act. IPAB is charged with dictating Medicare policy affecting millions of seniors and disabled Americans. It divests Congress’ responsibility and direct oversight and places it in a board of 15 unelected, unaccountable individuals with authority to enact health policy — without approval of the president or Congress.

The president’s address laid out grand plans for keeping America exceptional. Conspicuously missing, however, was a cost figure, or an explanation as to how he plans to pay for his initiatives. Considering the recent upsurge in the size and expenditures of Washington, Americans have a right to know where the states and their commercial and political rights lie in this equation.

The new health care law is a good place to start.

Barry Goldwater Jr., a former congressman, serves as chairman of the States Alliance for Balanced Insurance Regulation (www.sabir-us.org).

If you have an HMO you get minimal to no care just generic meds and fixes.....

If you have a PPO you get better than HMO care with good to excellent care and meds depending on you provider.

With POS you the the moon............

Why can't everyone have the same coverage the same level of care? Because you make less then 60K per year and have a HMO your insurance comapny won't authorize the less addictive drug but instead only authorizes morphine?

Because you have a HMO you won't be allowed to take an open MRI scan because that particular MRI machine costs more to run?

And after giving birth HMO mothers have to in most cases wait until the PPO and POS mothers get their tubes tied then the hosipital and doctor will work you into the schedule.......

Again I ask why can't all American's receive the same care? Or better yet why can't all Americans have the same care that our congress persons have? After all that is a government run and taxpayer funded healthcare thingy.......

Granny no one wants to call you names or demean you but different policies have different premiums. The old saying is you get what you pay for.

All narcotics are addictive.

If your HMO doesn't cover an MRI, then you have to pay for it yourself.

Sorry your comment regarding people waiting for someone to get their tubes tied is silly - sorry. All doctors/hospital schedule procedures regardless of who is paying the bill.

If you think everyone can have the same care as our elected royalty, sorry that would break the bank even more. You know this bill is a piece of key-rap since they wrote it to exempt them. We are peons and must let them tell us what we will get, when we get it. If you think we have problems now wait for the Advisory Board is in charge.

Obviously you aren't on Medicare yet. Medicare denies more procedures than any private insurance company. And if you want extra coverage to pick up the balance which Medicare doesn't pay, get out your wallet. Ditto for dental and vision coverage.

Insurance should be for catastrophic coverage and the recipient should pick up doctors visits, etc. People will quit running to the doctor for the sniffles if they have to pay for it themselves.

One of the delightful parts of this bill which no one seems to know about yet is the tax one must pay when one sells their house. THOUSANDS! It is a part of OBAMACARE!!!!

The first 250K of profit is exempt for an individual and 500K for a couple. That means 250K or 500K capital gain will have the same regular capital gains tax and the same exemption on that capital gain if you reinvestment in a home in 2 years. So this new tax will only effect very high end homes and it's only on a portion that is not exempted. But I'm glad that you're fighting for people like me who this actually effects.

And if you want extra coverage to pick up the balance which Medicare doesn't pay, get out your wallet. Ditto for dental and vision coverage.

Medicare was never designed to be a premium plan, it was meant to provide basic care as safety net b/c we long ago linked health care to employers. So once you retired it was often lost. If people want premium plans buy a supplemental and one that isn't subisidized by medicare to the tune of nearly 20billion/yr that goes to private insurers.

Granny no one wants to call you names or demean you but different policies have different premiums. The old saying is you get what you pay for.

All narcotics are addictive.

If your HMO doesn't cover an MRI, then you have to pay for it yourself.

Sorry your comment regarding people waiting for someone to get their tubes tied is silly - sorry. All doctors/hospital schedule procedures regardless of who is paying the bill.

If you think everyone can have the same care as our elected royalty, sorry that would break the bank even more. You know this bill is a piece of key-rap since they wrote it to exempt them. We are peons and must let them tell us what we will get, when we get it. If you think we have problems now wait for the Advisory Board is in charge.

Obviously you aren't on Medicare yet. Medicare denies more procedures than any private insurance company. And if you want extra coverage to pick up the balance which Medicare doesn't pay, get out your wallet. Ditto for dental and vision coverage.

Insurance should be for catastrophic coverage and the recipient should pick up doctors visits, etc. People will quit running to the doctor for the sniffles if they have to pay for it themselves.

Thanks for your answer but first MRIs should be available to anyone whom their doctor thinsx needs one...... in most cases it is a preventive and even life saving procedure. but should not be ordered fiviously by doctors. In many cases if a doctor can identify and treat a problem early the outcome is better ergo less cost in treatment of that patricular ailment. In past years my doctor ordered a MRI for me i could not do the traditional MRI in the tube because I have severe clostrophobia so I had to do it in an open MRI machine. The receitionst who verifys insurance told me that I was lucky beacuse if I didn't have a PPO I would have never been aurhorized to use that machine. Thank God the problem was identified ... treatment was givien and all is well now.

Second..I have first hand experience with the tubligation thingy. My daughter a LVN - 26 yrs old with employer based insurance had to wait two days after giving birth to have her tubes tied for the very reason I cited in my earlier post...at Kaiser Permanente Hosp. The nurse (RN) on duty at the time was the source of my information.

As far as the "elected royalty" is concerned the slogan "the American People want" is a slur to every American's intelligence because they are talking down to the same people who pay for their healthcare as well as their salaries.

I have a skin ailment, had it since birth by no fault of my own, the only way i can get medicine is to go to the doctor, i dont want to go to the doctor because i know whats wrong with me and can call out the different medicines by name and dosage but i have to go. Will your "pay as you go" plan work for me 'No". I have a pre exsiting condition and i'm a women. Insurance premiums for me are outrageous. I get a job with insurance and i have to suffer through what ever waiting period they have. The health care reform debate is stupid, people are really suffering, not people with just sniffles, but people with real ailments. If the government can make me get auto insurance what is the crime with requiring health insurance. Why can't I just "pay as I hit" on the road?

Gee, it's hard to know where to start responding to a comment by an insurance lobbyist, but here's the mission statement of his paymaster. (Politico: you should be more upfront about this.)

We can end by saying that most of what this paid flack says is simply wrong. The U.S. ranks behind every other industrialized country in the world in public health statistics--for example, life expectancy and infant mortality. We have among the longest waits to see a specialist. The programs he attacks include Medicare, which consistently polls as the most popular government program. Social security is not going bankrupt. Do nothing and it will remain solvent for decades, and raising the income level at which it is taxed will keep it solvent forever.

Nobody in the UK, which is straight up socialized medicine, including Cameron would go anywhere near repealing it.

We have the best health care system that money can buy--if you have the money to buy it. We have been rationing care for years based on the ability to pay.

This whole debacle is a disgrace. Can we not Learn from others mistakes? (Europe).

I would rather spend money to fix this entitlement, then waste it on all these other 'projects' where we don't even know what the hell happened to the Tax Payers Money.. Shovel Ready? "Let's make a "Money for your Vote" deal ?

Oh, I am just so glad I don't have to live my life everyday thinking about what a Moron I am for having voted for Obama inclusive of his ilk ...

Schoup: "The first 250K of profit is exempt for an individual and 500K for a couple. That means 250K or 500K capital gain will have the same regular capital gains tax and the same exemption on that capital gain if you reinvestment in a home in 2 years. So this new tax will only effect very high end homes and it's only on a portion that is not exempted. But I'm glad that you're fighting for people like me who this actually effects."

You are almost correct on the exemption, however it only applies to owner occupied property. Thus most rentals and all commercial and vacant land sales will be charged the 3.8%. With the housing crisis more and more people are having to rent so in the end they end up paying it. If I remember correctly this tax is one of 130 or so differant taxes or fees that were implemented to pay for this new system.

Realistically I think most people are reasonably satisfied with their current health care insurance. Obviously there's room for improvement but I think that can be handled by state governments or true bi-partisian legislation.

If you want to see genuinely hideous waiting times, walk into any private hospital ER in the U.S. where waiting times have steadily risen, and patients now typically spend more than four hours trying to get needed care.

"Best medical system in the world?" that may be a nice rightwing talking point, but bears no relationship to reality. World rankings typically put us far below other industrialized nations. The most recent, a UNICEF report issued in December in which the U.S. ranked a paltry 22nd in health care for our children.

Rely on the market to control costs? Perhaps you haven't noticed that the market has been in control of our healthcare system for decades, and horribly botched the job on costs as well as access. When companies like Blue Shield of California can thumb their nose at the public by raising rates by up to 59% for individuals, it shows the market can not be relied on to look out for anyone's interests but their own profits.

The new healthcare law has plenty of shortcomings. Repealing it to give us more pain and suffering from the private market is hardly the solution.

If you want to see genuinely hideous waiting times, walk into any private hospital ER in the U.S. where waiting times have steadily risen, and patients now typically spend more than four hours trying to get needed care.

"Best medical system in the world?" that may be a nice rightwing talking point, but bears no relationship to reality. World rankings typically put us far below other industrialized nations. The most recent, a UNICEF report issued in December in which the U.S. ranked a paltry 22nd in health care for our children.

Rely on the market to control costs? Perhaps you haven't noticed that the market has been in control of our healthcare system for decades, and horribly botched the job on costs as well as access. When companies like Blue Shield of California can thumb their nose at the public by raising rates by up to 59% for individuals, it shows the market can not be relied on to look out for anyone's interests but their own profits.

The new healthcare law has plenty of shortcomings. Repealing it to give us more pain and suffering from the private market is hardly the solution.

Realistically I think most people are reasonably satisfied with their current health care insurance.

HAve you talked to people? I have always had insurance, PPOs - and I'm healthy, but my kids are kids, so broken bones, etc., - always the same "game" - claim gets denied. You call, get run-around - we made a mistake, or you didn't send in the form that proves your son is in college, (we did), etc ... talk to doctors offices - they get the run-around all the time.

PROFIT is the enemy of care in a care-for-profit system of insurance. They have every incentive (profit) to deny/delay paying claims.

I have seen it getting worse -- I don't think there are good insurance companies any longer, all varying degrees of bad.